hari504504 Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Why don't you explain in simple words how killing defenseless animals makes you a Human being let alone civilized ? I'd love to understand your definition of being civilized, right now I wouldn't even know what to focus on..from what i read I think you believe harming no animals (being vegetarian) is the only way to be civlized. Am I reading it wrong ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hari504504 Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 lol, I quoted your post bb..how did my post end up above you ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hari504504 Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 don't worry about my definition. You explain to me logic behind how such a thing is just a normal act. Cause suffering and killing happens everywhere among all species whether we like it or not. Animals are killed for food, for their bodyparts or simply as trophies - dying/killing was never meant to be a beautiful thing. If you look beyond animals- humans kill other humans in an equally grotesque way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Cause suffering and killing happens everywhere among all species whether we like it or not. Animals are killed for food, for their bodyparts or simply as trophies - dying/killing was never meant to be a beautiful thing. If you look beyond animals- humans kill other humans in an equally grotesque way. It's okay to kill defenseless animals to get something to put around your waist, or something to put your credit cards in, or something to rest your ass on. It's also okay to keep them captive and drink milk intended for their little kids. Those guys being killed are armed with nuclear weapons it seems. But kill for food and that disqualifies you from being a human. Welcome to logic chewtiyagiri and good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hari504504 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 So there is no difference between us and other species then. Brilliant. Again since you understand that this is not normal and yet continue to do so is the reason why people who do such things are worse than wild animals. You don't use anything made of leather ? I am quite sure now that you are vegetarian, to each his own. Why villify others for what they prefer to eat ? This is the kindof logic that is the bane of the world today, instead of sticking to one's preferences and just living your life the way you want..trying to impose it on others, if they are disbelievers call them 'kafir' or uncivilized/wild animals in this case and the aggravation goes on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Lets simply this in very very simple words ... Sorry, no speak Americano. What I was expecting of you : To categorically condemn any such act against any animal anywhere. You don't need any dogma from any denomination to explain this sentiment. Humanism will do. Why ? : Because it is not what you would expect from civilized people. Otherwise there is no difference between us and wild junglee janwars. Nice logic this!!! Now in your reply to this post, if you do not condemn in this very thread everything that is wrong with the world; right from Nazism, Facism, Dowry, Casteism, Racism, Hobbits, Trolling, Joginder Sharma, Lauki ki sabzi, Sunita's cooking etc I'm going to invoke your logic and say that there indeed isn't any difference between you and a wild junglee janwar. Because that's what civilized people do, right? Condemn any random thing on an unrelated thread on the internet. Like I said before, and others ( hari, ravi, outsider) in this thread have told you too, the thread is about a crime. If you want to discuss animal sacrifice/ vegetarianism/ assassination of Julius Caesar etc please open a new thread. I don't see any reason to answer tangential questions on animal sacrifice here. Especially when you haven't been able (or didn't want) to comprehend the gist of my reply to Kriterion. What you did : Explain that animals other than the cow will work just as well and went on to produce some dogma to back up your argument which you claim to be fact. If this is a fact then it is further damning indictment of the medieval and barbaric nature of Islam. Seriously? Is this is what you've understood, that too after I've explained THRICE? Utmost respect to you, but you're losing the plot here. I haven't said anything which should elicit such a response. You're assuming stuff and asking me why I'm justifying/propogating xyz/abc. Truth is, I haven't done either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 yo moron ' date=' Whose defending these things ?[/quote'] I take it you use khadi belts, couches, and wallets, don't consume animal products in any form, and make sure that any wood you use did not lead to some poor ants' or termites' adobe being destroyed. And anyhow using your logic from this very thread which you are applying so brilliantly on Mariyam, since you have not explicitly condemned these things, the default assumption is that you support them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Un-related ? So the cow did not get killed here ? You did not tell a cow could have been substituted with another animal ? Or may be I don't shpeako Muslimano ? Again perhaps I dont shpeako muslimano and dont understand it either ... but feel free to ask anyone what you meant when you said : "In fact, the qurbani in itself is the prerogative of the malik e nisab. And any large mammal can be sacrificed. " Pretty much sums up your level of comprehension and how you go around from one thread to another as my personal stalking b!tch attributing "statements" to me. Forward to the future - in some thread you will claim that Mariyam said it's okay to sacrifice any large mammal in a temple and doesn't have to be a cow.:hatsoff: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 says the harami that stalks me on other sites .... No need to stalk and walk. Aapke chewtiyaape itne nayaab hote hain ki padhne waale door se hi pehchaan lete hain. Thats your lizard buddhi talking ... because nowhere in this thread have I said that. Where did I say that you said that Mariyam said in this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Again perhaps I dont shpeako muslimano and dont understand it either ... but feel free to ask anyone what you meant when you said : "In fact, the qurbani in itself is the prerogative of the malik e nisab. And any large mammal can be sacrificed. " No one else has had any problems comprehending what I said there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maniac Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Wow....some of the posts are taking this thread in all kind of tangents....What people kill to eat or cook is their own thing but shouldn't this thread be about how religious sentiments were hurt. Forget about cow or Pig or any taboo or holy animal....killing any animal in a place of worship doesn't it affect the sanctity of that place? The whole incident was about making a statement to hurt others and I hope we should stick to that rather than arguing about animals in religion,creationism,animal rights,veganism etc. These ***** tried to stir up religious tensions and I think that is the way I view this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kriterion Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 There are also the written teachings of islam - Koran and Hadith' date=' and the actions of Muslims can be correlated with them to arrive at reasoned opinion.[/quote'] Right, but what about when the Quran doesn't mentioning slaughtering cows and dumping the remains in a Hindu temple...or for example leaving pig entrails at a synagogue...but a few muslims decide to do it anyway? How about my buddies to like to have a beer every Saturday...does that correlate with any reasoned opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kriterion Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 seedhi' date=' In the 70 jawans thread he claims that a vast chunk of Muslims don't understand Islam as it was intended by Muhammad except for Kriterion and a tiny set of people. He even claims that a whole bunch of reputed Islamic scholars beginning from Bukhari , Ibn Kathir to Muhsin Khan, to Yusuf Ali,to Shakir, to Maududi etc etc etc, to the current head clerics of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other Islamic countries don't understand Islam. Only he understands.[/quote'] Yes the vast chunks of Muslims who are illiterate, have grasped the principles of Islamic aqeedah because we're all madrassah grads! How many muslims actually pray 5x a day? How many read the Quran? Now how many of those do you think could name the distinct components of Islamic aqeedah? How many of them can differentiate between a Meccan verse and a Medina one, based on content? As for the "scholars", yes some of them have done great work, but exactly who has "reputed" them? Reputed by muslims, most of whom couldn't read and write? Reputed by themselves? If its the former, than thats as good as a high school dropout being reputed as the next Einstein by a coterie of retared meth addicts. If its the later, you can't knock me for "reputing" myself above them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hari504504 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 So the posters on this thread who comprehend it as "Killing defenseless animals is disgracefull" are ........ ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Yes the vast chunks of Muslims who are illiterate, have grasped the principles of Islamic aqeedah because we're all madrassah grads! How many muslims actually pray 5x a day? How many read the Quran? Now how many of those do you think could name the distinct components of Islamic aqeedah? How many of them can differentiate between a Meccan verse and a Medina one, based on content? As for the "scholars", yes some of them have done great work, but exactly who has "reputed" them? Reputed by muslims, most of whom couldn't read and write? Reputed by themselves? If its the former, than thats as good as a high school dropout being reputed as the next Einstein by a coterie of retared meth addicts. If its the later, you can't knock me for "reputing" myself above them.One only has to look at the Hadith, which contain the writings and actions of the early muslims, including Mohammad and his companions to come to a conclusion. Surely, the companions of Mohammad were best placed to understand Islam and his teachings. Also, it seems absurd to me that the 1400 year old history of Muslims and their actions, especially those in positions of power and leadership, and the social mores of Islamic societies should not be taken into account for an evaluation of the ideology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seedhi Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Right, but what about when the Quran doesn't mentioning slaughtering cows and dumping the remains in a Hindu temple...or for example leaving pig entrails at a synagogue...but a few muslims decide to do it anyway? How about my buddies to like to have a beer every Saturday...does that correlate with any reasoned opinions?Reams and reams of hatred has been spewed against idolatry in Islamic canon and you cannot correlate that to the desecration of temples? There is a very long history of these despicable acts in the subcontinent. There is not much of a gap morally, in violently smashing idols/images of deities and this incident. Both are rooted in hatred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sachin34357 Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 Modi might have said that his Government would not allow any religious group belonging to a majority or a minority to incite hatred, but things in India are far from over. The ban on beef by the Maharashtra government has already kicked off a huge country-wide rage, this was made even worse when Haryana (another BJP ruled state) decided to follow suit. The latest twist into the ban of beef is the following video which has been going viral. The video allegedly features a muslim cow trader who was trading cows for his hindu employer. It shows him tied to an electric pole and surrounded by a fundamentalist mob which is thrashing him and inciting him to utter Jai Shri Ram. jLQoOAo7jkY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Merlyn Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 There is no context.We dont even know what its about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amiret Posted March 27, 2015 Share Posted March 27, 2015 These same cowards will never dare to attack businesses selling leather products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachinism Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 The amount of crap done in the name of religion, no religious person should ever think about claiming the moral high ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts